An unlicensed office employee of an Arizona insurer helped a licensed agent place a life policy and now asks for a share of the commission on the sale. Under Arizona law, may she be paid it?

Why B is correct

A.R.S. 20-298 permits commissions only for persons properly licensed. The employee's assistance does not change her unlicensed status, so neither the agent's consent nor the insurer's employment relationship can make the commission lawful. Allowing the payment would circumvent the licensing system that A.R.S. 20-282 establishes for transacting insurance.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) Wrong because the agent's agreement cannot cure the employee's lack of a license; A.R.S. 20-298 bars commission payments to unlicensed persons regardless of consent.
• C) Wrong because working for the insurer is not a substitute for licensure; A.R.S. 20-298 keys commissions to holding a license.
• D) Wrong because commission eligibility does not turn on how close she was to the solicitation; unlicensed persons may not receive commissions under A.R.S. 20-298.

Memory hook

Helping on a sale earns a paycheck, not a commission — no license, no commission.